Author: Sandro Necchi
Date: 09:54:21 12/30/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 30, 2005 at 12:41:33, Uri Blass wrote:
>On December 30, 2005 at 12:22:56, Sandro Necchi wrote:
>
>>On December 30, 2005 at 09:58:42, Mircea wrote:
>>
>>>On December 30, 2005 at 09:33:10, Sandro Necchi wrote:
>>>
>>>>On December 30, 2005 at 09:16:53, Mathieu Pagé wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On December 30, 2005 at 07:01:49, Ryan B. wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On December 30, 2005 at 06:56:17, Sandro Necchi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On December 30, 2005 at 06:53:25, Ted Summers wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I can't hold it any more, "YES, YES, YES!!!". I am sure Rybka will win Paderborn
>>>>>>>>2005! way to go Vasik Rajlich! Your program is a great piece of work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>well, it did play the best chess and deserve to win.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>it was lucky too as should have lost against Shredder and this one, but good
>>>>>>>players are always lucky so...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>congratulations again!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Sandro
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I agree, good and lucky.
>>>>>
>>>>>Last times I looked at the rules of chess there was no luck involved (Maybe you
>>>>>are talking about the pairing).
>>>>
>>>>It is not Rybka fault if two opponents blundered in a winning position, but I
>>>>would call this luck...do you have a better word?
>>>>The games are there to be seen...
>>>[Event "Buenos Aires WCh (27)"]
>>>[Site "Buenos Aires WCh (27)"]
>>>[Date "1927.??.??"]
>>>[Round "?"]
>>>[White "Capablanca Jose"]
>>>[Black "Alekhine Alexander"]
>>>[Result "1/2-1/2"]
>>>[ECO "D65"]
>>>[Opening "QGD"]
>>>[Variation "Orthodox, Rubinstein, 9.cxd5 exd5 10.Bd3 h6 11.Bh4"]
>>>[TimeControl "40/1800:40/1800:40/1800"]
>>>[Termination "normal"]
>>>[PlyCount "76"]
>>>[WhiteType "program"]
>>>[BlackType "program"]
>>>
>>>1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Nbd7 5.e3 Be7 6.Nf3 O-O 7.Rc1 a6 8.cxd5 exd5
>>>9.Bd3 c6 10.Qc2 h6 11.Bh4 Ne8 12.Bg3 Bd6 13.O-O Bxg3 14.hxg3 Nd6 15.Na4 Re8
>>>16.Rfe1
>>>Nf6 17.Ne5 Nfe4 18.Qb3 Be6 19.Nc5 Nxc5 20.dxc5 Nb5 21.a4 Nc7 22.Bb1 Bc8 23.Nf3
>>>Ne6
>>>24.e4 dxe4 25.Rxe4 Re7 26.Rce1 Bd7 27.Qc2 g6 28.Ba2 Qf8 29.Ne5 Qg7 30.Nxd7 Rxd7
>>>31.Bxe6 fxe6 32.Rg4 Kh7 33.Rxe6 Rg8 34.Qe4 Rf7 35.f4 Qf8 36.Rgxg6 Qxc5+ 37.Kf1
>>>Qc1+
>>>38.Kf2?? {This was luck too, don't you think?} Qd2+ {} 1/2-1/2
>>
>>Yes, everytime the opponent blunder it is luck; the same for humans and
>>computers...one can expect that to happen, but the opponent is not forced to do
>>it...
>>
>>One cannot play weaker to expect the opponent will blunder...it is not a good
>>strategy...
>
>It depend on the case.
>
>If you lose against correct play regardless of your choice than it may be better
>not to play the move that lead to a slower loss but the move that gives your
>opponent a chance to blunder and I also did it in the past and got a draw when I
>am sure that in that case computer move was practically leading to a loss.
>
>There are also cases when the stronger player may prefer to get inferior
>position and not to draw by repetition and I know about a case when a player did
>exactly that and won the game.
Uri,
I agree with you but one thing is an inferior position and another a lost
position.
I know that sometimes one may decide to chose an inferior position to increase
the chances to win, but this strategy works only if the opponent is inferior and
not otherwise.
Sandro
>
>Uri
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.